Here is the information that led to the headline, five paragraphs later:

[Boasberg] said there were no plans to close any more elementary schools, because most are 95 percent full, with some even reaching 100 percent to 110 percent capacity.

It is not just that Boasberg says ELEMENTARY schools won’t be closed (and if you follow DPS, you know this is not where the problems are), but he goes on to state the reason: capacity.

Is it so much to ask that media coverage might both consider that not all schools are elementary, and that since there remain middle and high-schools that are severely under capacity, there might be a reason he was so specific? Especially since much of the rationale for Boasberg’s appointment includes continuing policies that would not forgo closing additional underperforming, under capacity schools, and it’s reasonable to assume no sensible superintendent would take this issue off the table entirely before they even started.

In all fairness, headlines are usually written by the editors, not the reporter, so don’t blame the byline. But still, to write a headline committing a yet-to-be-superintendent with an established position on a controversial topic which is not supported in the same story is pretty ugly.